Mamiya Lens Comparisons Wanted

[Mort54]

I'd like to see some comparisons between the Mamiya 75-150 and the following three Mamiya lenses - 80, 120, and 150. Does anyone have some side by side shots they could post, with 100% crops so we can judge acuity?

[Mort54]

The zoom will be better than the 80 since the 80 leaves something to be desired. The 120 macro is simply the sharpest lens Mamiya makes. The 150 is good and it will be a toss up most likely. The new 150/2.8 due out next year will be a nice lens simply for the wider aperture from the current 3.5.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157913\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, but hopefully we can get someone to post some shots. I've heard a lot of people comment on these lenses and their pros and cons, but comparing actual shots would be ideal.

[amsp]

My 80mm is tack sharp, I just wish it had a sturdier build, like the 35mm. I kinda hope Mamiya will release a new 80mm D f/1.9, the old manual one had wicked DoF.

The zoom will be better than the 80 since the 80 leaves something to be desired. The 120 macro is simply the sharpest lens Mamiya makes. The 150 is good and it will be a toss up most likely. The new 150/2.8 due out next year will be a nice lens simply for the wider aperture from the current 3.5.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157913\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[canmiya]

I'd like to see some comparisons between the Mamiya 75-150 and the following three Mamiya lenses - 80, 120, and 150. Does anyone have some side by side shots they could post, with 100% crops so we can judge acuity?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157909\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i own all of the lenses you are asking about:  i do not have side by side comparisons of the lenses, as the macro and the zoom were purchased for very specific reasons. the 80 came with the afd2 kit and the 150 was purchased when i bought the kit.   the 75-150 is an excellent lens...in terms of sharpness, at 120mm it is behind the macro, but not by much.  the zoom is the lens which is mounted to the camera the most and generally only comes off when i need to go wider than 75mm or need to shoot at 80mm wider than f4.5.  if you need closer focusing  than 3.5 feet, the macro is the ticket.  if you can live without the macro capability and want af, the 75-150 is an excellent choice.    i should add that my copy of the 80 is very good.  of the lenses you listed, the 150 3.5 is my least used lens period.  i like the focal lenght, but it has never impressed me the way the 120  and the zoom do.
i realize this is not a side by side comparison, but it is feedback from an owner of all 4 lenses.

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I too have those lenses, minus the macro (I will have the new "D" in a few days) but plus the 28mm.

The 75-150 is at least as sharp as the 80 and the 150 - it is a very fine lens indeed. I did comparisons when I got it but have since deleted them. They led me to sell my 150mm.

I will do some new side-by-side comparisons when I get the macro "D" and post them. Be patient for a week or so!

Bill

i own all of the lenses you are asking about:  i do not have side by side comparisons of the lenses, as the macro and the zoom were purchased for very specific reasons. the 80 came with the afd2 kit and the 150 was purchased when i bought the kit.   the 75-150 is an excellent lens...in terms of sharpness, at 120mm it is behind the macro, but not by much.  the zoom is the lens which is mounted to the camera the most and generally only comes off when i need to go wider than 75mm or need to shoot at 80mm wider than f4.5.  if you need closer focusing  than 3.5 feet, the macro is the ticket.  if you can live without the macro capability and want af, the 75-150 is an excellent choice.    i should add that my copy of the 80 is very good.  of the lenses you listed, the 150 3.5 is my least used lens period.  i like the focal lenght, but it has never impressed me the way the 120  and the zoom do.
i realize this is not a side by side comparison, but it is feedback from an owner of all 4 lenses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158000\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Mort54]

Thanks all. Bill, I look forward to your comparison shots.

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Thanks all. Bill, I look forward to your comparison shots.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158065\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I now have the Mamiya Macro "D". I don't know how it differs from the previous version, but it has the extra contacts on the mount, and is clearly labelled Mamiya-Sekor D.

In the next few days I'll do some comparisons with the 75-150 and the 55-110 mm and see if I can post some Raw files.

Bill

[Mort54]

I now have the Mamiya Macro "D". I don't know how it differs from the previous version, but it has the extra contacts on the mount, and is clearly labelled Mamiya-Sekor D.

In the next few days I'll do some comparisons with the 75-150 and the 55-110 mm and see if I can post some Raw files.

Bill
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=160733\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Bill. I appreciate you following up on this. This should be interesting.

Mort.

[BJNY]

Does anyone have any good info as to who the European manufacturer of lenses for the upcoming Mamiya/Phase camera is/will be.  Are the 75-150 and 40-75 zooms possibly Schneider designs already?

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I'd like to see some comparisons between the Mamiya 75-150 and the following three Mamiya lenses - 80, 120, and 150. Does anyone have some side by side shots they could post, with 100% crops so we can judge acuity?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157909\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I did some tests today but the results are so surprising that I'm going to repeat them tomorrow. Here's what I have so far...

The 75-150 clearly beats the 55-110 at 80 mm, and also beats the 80, tho' not by so much. Pretty much what I expected. (I had tested the 80 and the 150 against the zoom several months ago - and sold the 150 as a result.)

The 75-150 clearly beats the 55-110 at 110 mm.(And all other shared focal lengths.) No surprise. The 75-150 is a very sharp, contrasty lens.

BUT, when I ran the 75-150 against the 120 Macro D - guess what? It beat it too. I did shots at infinity as well as 20-30 feet, and at the closest distance the 75-150 will focus. In all cases the center sharpness was superior with the 75-150, tho' the edge sharpness was possibly/maybe/perhaps  a teensy weensy (that's an optical expression) bit better with the Macro.

All tests were done on a heavy tripod, mirror-up, cable release, and f8. I did some at f11 too. I used auto focus for all lenses except the macro, which I focussed by eye and with the confirmation light in the viewfinder.

Because this result is counter-intuitive I wonder if I've got a faulty Macro lens. I'm going to retest tomorrow and if my current findings are confirmed, my dealer has said we can compare my Macro with another one in the store.

The bad news is I may have a faulty lens, The good news is that the 75-150 is even better than I thought.

Stay tuned,
Bill

[Mort54]

All tests were done on a heavy tripod, mirror-up, cable release, and f8. I did some at f11 too. I used auto focus for all lenses except the macro, which I focussed by eye and with the confirmation light in the viewfinder.

Thanks Bill. Great news if it holds up to your follow-on tests. On the 120, instead of focussing at infinity by eye, you might try setting it at infinity on the distance scale. I find when I focus some of my other lenses at infinity by eye, they aren't quite as sharp as just putting the distance scale at infinity.

Thanks again for doing this.

[canmiya]

I did some tests today but the results are so surprising that I'm going to repeat them tomorrow. Here's what I have so far...

The 75-150 clearly beats the 55-110 at 80 mm, and also beats the 80, tho' not by so much. Pretty much what I expected. (I had tested the 80 and the 150 against the zoom several months ago - and sold the 150 as a result.)

The 75-150 clearly beats the 55-110 at 110 mm.(And all other shared focal lengths.) No surprise. The 75-150 is a very sharp, contrasty lens.

BUT, when I ran the 75-150 against the 120 Macro D - guess what? It beat it too. I did shots at infinity as well as 20-30 feet, and at the closest distance the 75-150 will focus. In all cases the center sharpness was superior with the 75-150, tho' the edge sharpness was possibly/maybe/perhaps  a teensy weensy (that's an optical expression) bit better with the Macro.

All tests were done on a heavy tripod, mirror-up, cable release, and f8. I did some at f11 too. I used auto focus for all lenses except the macro, which I focussed by eye and with the confirmation light in the viewfinder.

Because this result is counter-intuitive I wonder if I've got a faulty Macro lens. I'm going to retest tomorrow and if my current findings are confirmed, my dealer has said we can compare my Macro with another one in the store.

The bad news is I may have a faulty lens, The good news is that the 75-150 is even better than I thought.

Stay tuned,
Bill
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161835\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

no faulty lens...the 75-150 is just that good.....i rarely use the macro anymore....

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I'd like to see some comparisons between the Mamiya 75-150 and the following three Mamiya lenses - 80, 120, and 150. Does anyone have some side by side shots they could post, with 100% crops so we can judge acuity?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157909\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have concluded my second round of testing, this time using  Paterson Optical Test Charts, which when used at a distance of 40 times the focal length, enable you to read off the line-pairs per mm.

Again, all shots were on a firm tripod, mirror up, cable release. This time I used f11 as it is my own most-used stop in real photography. (This is the first time in years I've used a test chart - mine is dated 1978 - because I much prefer to test with my normal subjects, landscapes, birds and other critters.)

The 110 Zoom was moved closer to the target to preserve the 40 times relationship and of course to ensure the targets came out the same size.

Here are the figures as I see them at 2:1 on my screen. Keep in mind that reading line-pairs per mm is a very inexact science - when does 66 lp/mm become 72? But I have been consistent and conservative in my interpretation, so even if the absolute figures are not correct, their relative values are.

Centre (center for my US friends) sharpness is Macro 60 lp/mm, 75-150 Zoom is 66+ lp/mm, 55-110 Zoom is 60 lp/mm.

Edge sharpness (on the horizontal, not corner) is Macro 36, 75-150 Zoom 48, 55-110 Zoom 42.

This  confirms my findings reported yesterday which were based on real life photos. In fact, my Macro is only as good as my 55-110 zoom at the center, and is not as good at the edges. (Yesterday I thought the Macro might be better at the edges; not so.)

I did my lp/mm counting first on completely unsharpened files, and then again using Lightroom's  "Landscape" preset. Made no difference in relative sharpness.

Interestingly, the 75-150 files look sharper than even they are because this lens has superb contrast.

My Macro is going back to the dealer. I cannot believe that it should only be as good as my e-Bay bought 55-110 zoom.

And before anybody states it, I know there is much more to a lens than simply resolution - but a this is where a macro lens is supposed to shine so that's what I've been examining.

Bill

[Mort54]

I have concluded my second round of testing, this time using  Paterson Optical Test Charts, which when used at a distance of 40 times the focal length, enable you to read off the line-pairs per mm.

Thanks again Bill. I'm sure everyone here really appreciates all of the effort you've put into this. I was considering getting a 120 to fill the gap between my 80 and 150, but based on your results, the 75-150 looks like an ideal choice to replace all three lenses. Even if your 120 proves to have a problem, the 75-150 would seem to be "good enough".

I gather from earlier comments you made that you found the 75-150 to be much sharper than the 150 prime. Is that right?

I think getting your 120 looked at is definitely in order, since it's always billed as the sharpest lens Mamiya makes. Yours obviously isn't.

Mort.

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Thanks again Bill. I'm sure everyone here really appreciates all of the effort you've put into this. I was considering getting a 120 to fill the gap between my 80 and 150, but based on your results, the 75-150 looks like an ideal choice to replace all three lenses. Even if your 120 proves to have a problem, the 75-150 would seem to be "good enough".

I gather from earlier comments you made that you found the 75-150 to be much sharper than the 150 prime. Is that right?

I think getting your 120 looked at is definitely in order, since it's always billed as the sharpest lens Mamiya makes. Yours obviously isn't.

Mort.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162101\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, Mort, I did find the zoom at least the equal of the 150 mm, though of course the 150 is faster and lighter than the zoom. The more I use the zoom, the happier I am with it. Right now it is my sharpest lens!

The Macro is going back to the dealer tomorrow. I'll tell you about its replacement if and when it arrives.

Best,
Bill

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Well, I have my macro lens back from the dealer who is sure there's nothing wrong with it. And I think he is right.

I conducted yet another set of tests today, this time in much brighter conditions. At infinity and normal distances I found the 75-150 zoom sharper than the macro (yet again!) at f11 - but the
macro seemed sharper at f8 and f5.6. And I think I now know why.

Whenever I was using shutter speeds faster than about 1/30, the macro looked great. When used speeds around 1/10 or 1/15, the zoom looked better. Given that all shots were taken with mirror lock-up, the answer has to be the shutter.

I have concluded that shutter motion causes blurring at slow speeds with the relatively light macro, whereas the quite heavy and longer zoom seems to resist the motion. The macro looked sharper at wider apertures because I was using faster shutter speeds - I compared f5.6 with f11 and it was true.

To test this further I took the camera off the tripod and put it on a solid wall and put my weight on it while the shutter tripped. Voila - sharper pix.

So my conclusion is now that the zoom is still marginally sharper at normal distances, and certainly has higher contrast, but the macro is it's equal at shorter distances. At close distances, as you would expect, the macro is quite superior.

This has been a long saga! The lesson for me is to avoid using the macro at speeds between about 1/2 and 1/30th unless it is heavily "damped" in some way.

Bill

[Mort54]

This has been a long saga! The lesson for me is to avoid using the macro at speeds between about 1/2 and 1/30th unless it is heavily "damped" in some way.

Hi Bill. Thanks again for keeping us all updated on this. The message I get out of this is that the 75-150, at longer distances (which is how I would primarily use it), holds it's own against the highly regarded 120 macro. Hi praise indeed for a zoom lens.

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Hi Bill. Thanks again for keeping us all updated on this. The message I get out of this is that the 75-150, at longer distances (which is how I would primarily use it), holds it's own against the highly regarded 120 macro. Hi praise indeed for a zoom lens.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=166516\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes - Canmiya's post on this thread is right.
Bill